On Tue, Mar 27, 2012 at 05:34, Guido van Rossum wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 26, 2012 at 8:23 PM, Eli Bendersky wrote:
>>> I think the PEP is almost ready for approval. Congratulations! A few
>>> comments:
>>>
>>> - I'd leave some wiggle room for the docs owner (Georg) about the
>>> exact formulation of
>
> I've marked it up as Approved. Thanks, and congrats!
>
Thanks!
Eli
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe:
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-ar
On Mon, Mar 26, 2012 at 8:23 PM, Eli Bendersky wrote:
>> I think the PEP is almost ready for approval. Congratulations! A few
>> comments:
>>
>> - I'd leave some wiggle room for the docs owner (Georg) about the
>> exact formulation of the text blurb included for provisional modules
>> and the glo
> I think the PEP is almost ready for approval. Congratulations! A few comments:
>
> - I'd leave some wiggle room for the docs owner (Georg) about the
> exact formulation of the text blurb included for provisional modules
> and the glossary entry; I don't want the PEP to have the last word
> here.
On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 2:51 AM, Eli Bendersky wrote:
> PEP 411 -- Provisional packages in the Python standard library
>
> Has been updated with all accumulated feedback from list discussions.
> Here it is: http://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0411/ (the text is also
> pasted in the bottom of this e
On Mon, Mar 26, 2012 at 05:40, Eli Bendersky wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 24, 2012 at 13:53, Lennart Regebro wrote:
>> On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 10:51, Eli Bendersky wrote:
>>> The PEP received mostly positive feedback. The only undecided point is
>>> where to specify that the package is provisional. Curr
On Sat, Mar 24, 2012 at 13:53, Lennart Regebro wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 10:51, Eli Bendersky wrote:
>> The PEP received mostly positive feedback. The only undecided point is
>> where to specify that the package is provisional. Currently the PEP
>> mandates to specify it in the documentati
On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 10:51, Eli Bendersky wrote:
> The PEP received mostly positive feedback. The only undecided point is
> where to specify that the package is provisional. Currently the PEP
> mandates to specify it in the documentation and in the docstring.
> Other suggestions were to put it
